Friday, December 31, 2010

In the last week or so, several media outlets havereferenceda “recent” report which cites a 70 percent failure rate for TSA to detect guns and knives passing through airport checkpoints. Some stories acknowledge the outdated covert testing report while not acknowledging the steps that have been taken since then to improve security. All are misleading.

It's important to note that while the report was issued in 2006 and appeared in the media in 2007, the tests it references were actually carried out in 2004-2005.

Let me point out a few things that aren't getting reported:

New Security Measures: Since 2004-2005, TSA has implemented new security measures and deployed enhanced technology, which reflect TSA's evolving approach to aviation security. Among TSA's many layers of security, both seen and unseen, these include the following:

Advanced technology X-ray systems, used to screen carry-on baggage, which feature multiple views of the item and enhanced detection capability. Currently, there are more than 940 AT X-ray units deployed to airports nationwide.

Advanced imaging technology, which safely screen passengers for both metallic and non-metallic threats, including weapons and explosives. There are nearly 500 units deployed to airports, and the use of the technology has led to the detection of more than 130 dangerous or illegal items in the last year.

Enhanced pat-downs, which were deployed to greatly increase TSA's detection capabilities for threats such as those seen last year on Christmas Day.

Limited Scope: Not only is the report nearly 5 years old, but the limited testing was conducted at only three out of 450 federalized U.S. airports.

Covert Testing Increases Security: TSA conducts covert testing in order to continually challenge our workforce and raise the bar to create stronger layers of security. As Administrator Pistole pointed out while testifying on the Hill recently, the results of covert tests informed TSA's decision to implement enhanced measures, such as new pat down procedures and the widespread deployment of advanced imaging technology.

Bottom line, TSA will continue to use every tool at our disposal - including new security measures based on the latest intelligence and covert testing results to keep the traveling public safe. Security is not static, but constantly evolves to meet the terrorist threats of tomorrow.

"There are nearly 500 units deployed to airports, and the use of the technology has led to the detection of more than 130 dangerous or illegal items in the last year."Wow! That is almost one pair of scissors found this year for every 4 nude scanners out there! Good work, guys! Keep it up!

Thank you for addressing this.However, you do not offer any more recent statistics. I would like to see recent statistics on whether or not the current measures are catching what they are supposed to.Most of us have heard of the pair of 12" razor blades that supposedly got through security as well as the loaded gun that slipped through more recently. Both of these happened within the past two years, if I am not mistaken.There are a number of genuinely concerned, logical, and reasonable citizens who would like to have access to this information in order to confirm that the TSA is accomplishing their goals.

Indeed, what are these goals? A 0% likelihood of terrorist attack is impossible, for there will always be a new/unknown technology. At what point does the % likelihood of attack become statistically insignificant?

Let me point out one thing that isn't getting reported: - you haven't reported on the results of more recent tests. This lack of transparency is... telling. Instead of complaining about old test results being recirculated, how about publishing new test results????

"Some stories acknowledge the outdated covert testing report while not acknowledging the steps that have been taken since then to improve security. All are misleading. "

Misleading, how? If you want us to trust the TSA's effectiveness, publish the results of more recent testing, "Bob."

Convenient that the TSA decided to "classify" (sort of, SSI isn't really classified since most members of the TSA do not hold security clearances) the results of this testing. I'm told that the current results are not much better than those reported upon.

That the TSA's performance was poor several years ago in no way implies that it's better now.

Smarten up, Bob. The taxpayers deserve better service than this. The 112th Congress will be cleaning up the mess that is the TSA.

So what's the failure rate now? If it was good you would be bragging about it. We know you catch some guns because you busted Don King but you're not catching 100% because that guy with the Glock went through last month.

Saying "We sucked 5 years ago but we're better now" is not confidence inspiring. Saying that you only sucked at 3 out of 450 airports doesn't inspire confidence. Probably the airports that weren't tested were worse.

This high failure rate on carry-on-bags means that the nude-o-scopes, even if used properly, are largely useless. If you have a 70% chance of getting onto the plane by putting your gun in a carry-on, why would you try to conceal it on your person? What is the failure rate of detection on the nude-o-scopes?

The TSA should be concentrating on its primary mission: keeping guns and bombs off the planes. Stop looking for drugs, stop looking for nail clippers, stop searching for bottles of water. Stop harassing pregnant women. Stop checking ID's. When you start catching 90% of real threats then you can start making up some imaginary ones. The reality is that right now, there are too many ways to get a gun or a bomb onto a plane that don't require putting it in your underwear or mixing imaginary chemicals in the bathroom. Secure the baggage handling areas. When the TSA can make the guarantee to me that I can pack valuables in my luggage, then the checked baggage areas will be secure enough that I won't worry about bombs being slipped into luggage there.

Typically, the TSA is confiscating 2 guns a day. That means, given a 70% failure rate, that typically there are 6-7 guns flying. This may be lower today, but it was the statistical norm in 2004. Thankfully these guns must have belonged to law-abiding (though somewhat stupid) citizens, not terrorists.

Your agency sucks, it fails at keeping us safe and you've just been lucky.

There is something glaringly missing from this post - your failure levels today. I'm guessing since you don't publish them they actually got worst. This is highly probable, since you guys have been distracted by new policies looking for all sorts of silly, not dangerous, items.

The statement that you purchased new X-rays is misleading. You did not invest well in X-rays capable of, say, looking into my bag in a way to allow me to keep my laptop inside. Instead, you decided to purchase X-rays that virtually strip-search people.

"...Security is not static, but constantly evolves to meet the terrorist threats of tomorrow."

Constantly evolving......

It certainly looks like that within a very short time, the "evolution" that the TSA is imposing on the people of the United States will strip us of EVERY SINGLE ONE OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS under the guise of protecting us.

First it was the gross and rediculous notion that simply using the word, "Administrative" means that citizens lose their 4th Amendment rights, and now citizens are being arrested at the airports for exercising their First Amendment rights to speak up against the TSA's abuse of our other rights.

Anonymous pointed out... The statement that you purchased new X-rays is misleading. You did not invest well in X-rays capable of, say, looking into my bag in a way to allow me to keep my laptop inside. **********************************Which brings up a very good point-in the past several years, since that outdated data Bob is so dismissive of, the TSA has launched various campaigns to make sure things like laptops, large electronics, & even shoes are screened by themselves instead of leaving them in the carryons where they belong.

In other words, a campaign to dumb down the process because the screeners had a detection failure rate of 70+%.

So, as others have asked, Bob-what is the CURRENT detection failure rate in this era of everything gets its own bin?

In early December, John Pistole was quoted in a lot of the mainstream media as saying every test gun, bomb part or knife got past screeners at some airports. Since he was only confirmed to the position less than a year ago, I can't imagine that he'd be talking about previous failures of over four years ago, but about current failures that he planned to address.

This blog is typical of the TSA reactionary stance on, well, pretty much everything. If y'all did something right the first time, about half of your detractors would simply die of shock.

Why do you continue to waste taxpayer dollars with postings that offer no data and no information? For those of us who are frequent travelers and witness the behaviors of many TSA employees, no one is surprised by reports of incompetence. What private sector company would think they can take a person with a few weeks of training, classify them as a professional, and ordain them as a security officer to protect our country? Only the TSA.

Classic government obfuscation tactics - to keep people from knowing the truth just don't report it. Kind like the Fed did with the size of the money supply. They just stopped reporting the data in 2006. Or the Bureau of Labor Statistics with inflation. They just don't report real inflation any more.

Apparently all the previous commenters have missed the BIGGEST iron of Bob's post:

"Limited Scope: Not only is the report nearly 5 years old, but the limited testing was conducted at only three out of 450 federalized U.S. airports."

So they complain that a sample of security only 3 airports is insufficient to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of security. This from the same agency that uses a study of AIT installations at only 3 airports at proof of their safety.

Great way to start the year! FFirst admit that you actually did fail 70% of the time (even if it was a few years ago in a few airports), then somehow avoid providing any new data, or even telling us that the current rates are better than that!

If the next post from the TSA and from Bob is anything other than a verifiable number of the current rate, and is instead either "we can't tell you" or "that number doesn't exist" or a humor post, or a puppy post, or anything - ANYTHING - when a VERY easy to understand and answer question is being asked by EVERYBODY...

...we have the first true and incontrovertible proof of the fact that this blog is nothing more than sheer propaganda with no real value to the American taxpayer, who is paying for it.

Boilerplate:American's have a right to travel freely within their borders, by any legal conveyance;The 4th amendment requires probably cause for searches.

You know why the press uses this outdated data? Because it is the only data it has! It is correct to use it, since it pertains to the TSA, and you fully admit that it is real data here. Unless you give new data, they should stick with what they have.

As many above, I suspect the new data may actually be worse than 70%. Considering you are now distracted by silly new little rules and procedures, and won´t reveal new numbers, I estimate something around 85% for 2010.

Any security procedure that depends on people staying alert and watching a scanner display for hours day after day will never be effective. People just can't do this. You fancy new scanners won't change this and I doubt the failure rate has changed.

As many other US citizens here & elsewhere have called for - show us more current data!

Also, you think we should feel better because you are virtually strip searching & irradiating us w the new scanners or sexually assaulting us with body searches ( calling them pat-downs is insulting & stupid). You haven't improved security. You are violating laws & the Constitution.

Yes, test results were not favorable then. Can we look at first the year: 2004-2005 TSA is 2-3 years old, a startup that had to perform with a learning curve leaning against experience. Previous practices created an environment for the birth of this agency. Now since, an agency that has to be 100% all the time, has performed exceptionally well. Wall Street wunderkinds are not expected to perform close to that level to earn mega bonuses. A better informed public is now flying with enhanced capbailties as to what may be inapproiate for flight. An airline industry is thriving, and an American public has lost the anxiety that came after 9/11. Hey, we are doing somehting right.

Now, Bob, I might not be good at math, but if I'm reading this right, at least 370 AIT machines did nothing but take naked pictures of people, right? So, if you are a AIT screener, a busy YEAR entails finding one item? That doesn't sound very effective or efficient.

You can continue to invest in X-rays and whole body imaging machines, and you will continue to have dismal failure rates. Why? It is a human trait to be dismally bad at detecting rare objects visually:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/n7041/full/435439a.html

Yet another article from the World´s top scientific journal Nature, the same journal that stated there is no science behind the SPOT program.

It's become fairly clear that this blog has transitioned from useful information to a PR stunt gone wrong, when a majority of the posts are obfuscation, including this one.

Like everyone else has said - you didn't provide update numbers, nor did you say the older numbers were inaccurate at the time. Therefore, the correct thing to do is to presume the current numbers are roughly in line with the old ones, say a 60-80% failure rate.

In resonse to Anonymous:""There are nearly 500 units deployed to airports, and the use of the technology has led to the detection of more than 130 dangerous or illegal items in the last year."Wow! That is almost one pair of scissors found this year for every 4 nude scanners out there! Good work, guys! Keep it up!"

While I can see how the numbers shown in the article are small in comparison to the amount of scans going on, I respectfully disagree with your approach to the subject. (as indicated by your apparently sarcastic tone). Seeing how far TSA's measures have improved since 2004/2005, isn't it reasonable to admit that while they may be catching, as you say, 1/4 now that they may be improving the scans in the future? And really, if one out of every four people is caught with some sort of "weapon" (scissors aren't usally classified as weapens but for the purpose of this topic could be used as such)isn't that 25% less of a chance that someone is going to come and hurt you with said scissors? Just a thought.

"We've had a series of reports actually going back several years from the inspector general, from the General Accounting Office, and our own TSA Office of Inspection, where they do, as you describe, covert testing," Pistole acknowledged to George Stephanopoulos last month during an interview on Good Morning America. "And unfortunately, [undercover testers] have been very successful over the years."

They point out many of the same arguments made here, then remind us that the ABC News piece didn't rely on the 2004-2005 numbers, but rather on sources briefed on more recent data. One of the sources was John Pistole.

What do you bloggers expect? Do you think that a terrorist is attempting to get a bomb through everyday? You keep asking for evidence of the items TSA has found, multiple guns are found everyday. On average, how many people do you think attempt to carry a gun or bomb on board daily? For guns, I doubt it is that high. And bombs, it has not happened in the USA yet...The important question is, are the measures in place today going to keep us safe? Is TSA going to detect the passenger with a bomb that will eventually try to get though? I think so, only time will tell. We will really only know the answer when somone tries to sneak a bomb though one of the TSA checkpoints.

Unless current detection failure rates are published, we can only believe that they got worse after all the new technology and attention on thermos bottles to further distract your staff. There is no other reason to hide the current data from us.

The travelling public that flies on planes is already very safe and secure as compared to the travelling public that rides in cars.

The very best goal that TSA can hope to evolve towards is something that pushes the already insignificant threat of airplane damage out of the airplane in into the unprotected soft targets, like the checkpoint. (Checkpoints themselves are already targets of the terrorist threats of today -- See Iraq, Afgahnistan, etc... no evolution necessary.)

Is TSA going to detect the passenger with a bomb that will eventually try to get though? I think so, only time will tell. We will really only know the answer when somone tries to sneak a bomb though one of the TSA checkpoints.------------------------------------------

And in your world it somehow makes sense to spend millions and millions of dollars to prevent something so rare that no one has even attempted to do it it at least a decade? Well, heck, why don't we ramp up the TSA's black widow detection system? Of course, we won't know if it worked until someone tries to smuggle a bunch of black widow spiders onto a plane. But before you laugh, please think of how you might feel if you or a relative was bitten by a deadly black widow spider on a plane and we hadn't done everything in our power to stop it.

Do you people have any concept whatsoever of the scarcity of resources? Every dollar that TSA spends could be going to fight the things that actually kill us. I know that heart disease, cancer, and diabetes aren't as sexy as terrorism, but they are the actual threats to your life.

"Bottom line, TSA will continue to use every tool at our disposal - including new security measures based on the latest intelligence and covert testing results to keep the traveling public safe. Security is not static, but constantly evolves to meet the terrorist threats of tomorrow."

Blogger BobTSA Blog Team

...........I fail to see how TSA complies with the above statement when TSA fails to screen everyone equally that enters the secure areas of airports.

"DHS serves only one clear purpose: to provide unimaginable bonanzas for favored congressional districts around the United States, most of which face no statistically significant security threat at all. One thinks of the $436,504 that the Blackfeet Nation of Montana received in fiscal 2010 "to help strengthen the nation against risks associated with potential terrorist attacks"; the $1,000,000 that the village of Poynette, Wisconsin (pop. 2,266) received in fiscal 2009 for an "emergency operations center"; or the $67,000 worth of surveillance equipment purchased by Marin County, California, and discovered, still in its original packaging, four years later."

"As for the TSA, I am not aware of a single bomber or bomb plot stopped by its time-wasting procedures. In fact, TSA screeners consistently fail to spot the majority of fake "bombs" and bomb parts the agency periodically plants to test their skills. In Los Angeles, whose airport was targeted by the "millennium plot" on New Year's 2000, screeners failed some 75 percent of these tests."

On average, the TSA confiscates 2-3 guns per day, nationwide. Given a failure rate of 70%, there are 4-5 illegal guns flying every day.

Thankfully, those carrying the guns are law-abiding, albeit somewhat stupid, citizens. Were there actual terrorists trying to take over planes we would all be in big trouble.

TSA needs to concentrate on keeping guns and bombs off the planes. Stop confiscating water, stop confiscating small knives and pliers. Stop with the shoe removal already. Get people through security faster and work on making the lines shorter (a big line at the security checkpoint is a perfect terrorist target).

Focus, test and improve. When the TSA can boast a 99% success rate in catching guns and bombs in tests then maybe it's time to move onto something more challenging.

The nude-o-scopes are a big distraction for the TSA. Since you can't catch the guns in carry-ons (and we know this still happens - there was that guy with the Glock last month) why would a terrorist bother hiding a gun on their person? And what is the success rate of catching guns, knives, etc. with the nude-o-scopes? We know that at least one person was scanned with one and had their saw blades completely missed. How many guns have been missed by the nude-o-scopes?

The TSA is one big failure. You have not been successful since 9/11. You have been lucky. Stop lying to everyone about how wonderful you are and show some humility. Start working to improve and stop treating all of your customers as criminals.

RB said...Bob, is this going to be another series of questions you refuse to respond to?

I ask you softball questions based on information YOU posted and all of a sudden you get laryngitis of the fingers.

Why is that Bob?

If the TSA detection failure rate is not 70% what is the detection failure rate?

January 22, 2011 9:24 AM

........Still waiting Bob.

January 27, 2011 12:24 PM

......................And still waiting Bob.

January 29, 2011 10:11 AM.....................Bob, I know you've been busy writting a post slamming Mr. Mocek and then getting to eat another course of Crow but come on. You posted that the 70% TSA Detection Failure Rate was incorrect. All I or the others are asking for is the current TSA Failure Detection Rate.

It is your claim Bob that 70% is wrong so get a little backbone and finish up with some correct information.

So lets see if I get you anti TSA people right. You THINK you have the right to know every single little detail of how TSA does everything right? So this means you are in favor of letting the enemy know how best to get around the security that is in place and bring down another plane? Do I have this correct? Because thats what it sounds like to me. There is an old saying that still rings true today--"Loose lips sink ships". Why in the world would you give the enemy ANY kind of information that might help them? Simply because you think you have some right to know? And answer ONE question for me. How many planes have gone down since TSA took over? I'll wait. Times up. ZERO, NONE, NADA!! There is no way thats pure luck. Also why are you always blaming TSA for things that happen in other countries? The underwear bomber originated in Amsterdam or something. How is THAT TSA's fault?

Anonymous said... So lets see if I get you anti TSA people right. You THINK you have the right to know every single little detail of how TSA does everything right? So this means you are in favor of letting the enemy know how best to get around the security that is in place and bring down another plane? Do I have this correct? Because thats what it sounds like to me. There is an old saying that still rings true today--"Loose lips sink ships". Why in the world would you give the enemy ANY kind of information that might help them? Simply because you think you have some right to know? And answer ONE question for me. How many planes have gone down since TSA took over? I'll wait. Times up. ZERO, NONE, NADA!! There is no way thats pure luck. Also why are you always blaming TSA for things that happen in other countries? The underwear bomber originated in Amsterdam or something. How is THAT TSA's fault?

February 3, 2011 6:27 PM

.................I don't understand your claim of Anti-TSA for just asking what the Detection Failure Rate is since TSA says the reported 70% Detection Failure Rate is outdated.

Wouldn't you like to know just how well TSA is doing in their screenings?

So I ask again, Bob, if as you claim the 70% Detection Failure Rate is not accurate then what is the current TSA Detection Failure Rate?

He is absolutely correct. I find it appalling the number of sheep that are putting up with this. What happened to America? We used to be the home of the brave, after 9/11 we are now a nation of cowards jumping at every shadow. Pathetic.

Dear TSA, Don't feel bad. The Senator from the Great State of Maine did the same thing to the Capitol City Police after an incident back in '04/'05. Capitol City Police beat you with a hands down outright failure rate of 100% (failure) at all tested facilities. That's not to say they're useless or that they don't do their job or are without success in other areas (they also have a high rate of paycheck cashing.) Dear General Public, When keeping you safe counts; count on yourself.